Once-weekly albiglutide versus once-daily liraglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on oral drugs (HARMONY 7): a randomised, open-label, multicentre, non-inferiority phase 3 study
Summary Background As new members of a drug class are developed, head-to-head trials are an important strategy to guide personalised treatment decisions. We assessed two glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, once-weekly albiglutide and once-daily liraglutide, in patients with type 2 diabetes in...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The lancet. Diabetes & endocrinology 2014-04, Vol.2 (4), p.289-297 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Summary Background As new members of a drug class are developed, head-to-head trials are an important strategy to guide personalised treatment decisions. We assessed two glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, once-weekly albiglutide and once-daily liraglutide, in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on oral antidiabetic drugs. Methods We undertook this 32-week, open-label, phase 3 non-inferiority study at 162 sites in eight countries: USA (121 sites), Australia (9 sites), Peru (7 sites), Philippines (7 sites), South Korea (5 sites), UK (5 sites), Israel (4 sites), and Spain (4 sites). 841 adult participants (aged ≥18 years) with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes and a BMI between 20 and 45 kg/m2 were enrolled and randomised in a 1:1 ratio to receive albiglutide 30 mg once weekly titrated to 50 mg at week 6, or liraglutide 0·6 mg once daily titrated to 1·2 mg at week 1 and 1·8 mg at week 2. The randomisation schedule was generated by an independent randomisation team by the permuted block method with a fixed block size of 16. Participants and investigators were unmasked to treatment. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in HbA1c for albiglutide versus liraglutide, with a 95% CI non-inferiority upper margin of 0·3%. The primary analysis was by modified intention to treat. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01128894. Findings 422 patients were randomly allocated to the albigultide group and 419 to the liraglutide group; 404 patients in the abliglutide group and 408 in the liraglutide group received the study drugs. The primary endpoint analysis was done on the modified intention-to-treat population, which included 402 participants in the albiglutide group and 403 in the liraglutide group. Model-adjusted change in HbA1c from baseline to week 32 was −0·78% (95% CI −0·87 to −0·69) in the albigludite group and −0·99% (–1·08 to −0·90) in the liraglutide group; treatment difference was 0·21% (0·08–0·34; non-inferiority p value=0·0846). Injection-site reactions occurred in more patients given albiglutide than in those given liraglutide (12·9% vs 5·4%; treatment difference 7·5% [95% CI 3·6–11·4]; p=0·0002), whereas the opposite was the case for gastrointestinal events, which occurred in 49·0% of patients in the liraglutide group versus 35·9% in the albiglutide group (treatment difference −13·1% [95% CI −19·9 to −6·4]; p=0·00013). Interpretation Patients who received once-daily liraglutide had greater reduct |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2213-8587 2213-8595 |
DOI: | 10.1016/S2213-8587(13)70214-6 |